Sadly I just have v8.0. Can't afford to keep on buying new versions at full commercial price. I don't even qualify for an academic licence though all my work is now on EU research projects. Would be good if you could offer an annual maintenance contract for loyal customers, that provides updates as and when issued.

Sadly I just have v8.0. Can't afford to keep on buying new versions at full commercial price. I don't even qualify for an academic licence though all my work is now on EU research projects. Would be good if you could offer an annual maintenance contract for loyal customers, that provides updates as and when issued.

where
where iwvm = 500 ihvm = 500
numld is an integer array holding the number of points for each of the 39 graphs
xval is a double precision array of all the x values for all graphs
yval is a double precision array of all the y values for all graphs
ighandle = 1

The error message is
Argument No.7 of winio@ (continuation 1) should be a REAL*8

Definitely refers to this winio@ call - which has no continuation lines and is not over-length. Am I missing an argument somehow?

Last edited by silicondale on Fri Jan 26, 2018 3:07 pm; edited 1 time in total

This was just a snippet out of a large program. In fact each winop@ call was constructed by a formatted write because the numeric values had to be inserted from variables. What I posted was just the set of resulting calls.

In fact each winop@ call was constructed by a formatted write because the numeric values had to be inserted from variables

This 'formatted write' method, while ok for isolated cases could become a pain in the neck if required many times in a code.
why isn't it possible to allow parameter values to be entered as the variable name ?
Is it just a question that the parsing becomes a lot more complex and isn't foreseen to be implemented ?

The medium term aim should be to progressivly 'slimline' the native %pl capability. The uptopian goal being Dan's long-expressed wish to have an 'as-short-as-possible' single-line command. If the 'array input' options are expanded further (as discussed on previous comments in this thread) to cover more parameters then it's feasible, and the introduction of allowinf all inpur parameters to be via arguments would sensibly be included alongside.
[/quote]

Promisingly, for the above plot the selection of the x axis range from 7500 - 7710 gives a logical tics spacing of 25.

Can you try a couple of things maybe please SilicoDale when you have the time:
1. comment out the axes ranges definitions compltely and see what the 'automatic' selection of ranges produces.
2. select ranges of say : x: -110 to +7750
y: -35 to 135
(these are just arbitrary, plucked-ou-of-the-air values just to see wha t happens in v.8.2 with both the scales and with the axes labelling)

Ta.

Apart from that, you're next project should be to reproduce the CP1919 Pulsar ...

Since it reflects the Unknown Pleasures of ftn95 it could be a good new logo for Silverfrost to adopt, and would look good on T-shirts :O) ... just replace the writing with 'Native %pl' :O)

Current work on %pl will allow you to send %pl output to a printer using the printer's high resolution. So if you can get your T-shirt into the printer, all well and good.

As for implanting numeric values easily into a string of other characters, maybe you could write a Fortran function to do that. There are no plans to make winop@ work like winio@ in the sense of taking additional arguments.

Could you define a derived type record structure, as an alternative subroutine input for format %pl.
The record structure could have lots of fields, to cover all that have been discussed in this very long thread and there could be a PL_record_default parameter to set each series, something like: